But at first glace it doesn't look that bad.
I can see the appeal of rubberstamping what already exists.
That's the real problem with the proposed protocol; it solves today's problems for todays computers. It doesn't attempt to look ahead and solve problems that should be solved over the next ten years.
Seeing as it's going to take a few years and a huge amount of effort before HTTP 2 is widely adopted, we're going to need to start working on a replacement for it's even finished its rollout.
Poul-Hennings has written his thoughts on the problems that actually should be solved in the next version of HTTP: http://phk.freebsd.dk/words/ht...
The fact that the IETF has decided to ignore those problems so that HTTP 2 can be pushed out the door is what makes the situation be such a joke. Almost the only entities that will benefit from having HTTP 2 in the next 5 years are companies that have a web presence on the same scale as Google, Facebook, Twitter etc. that will save a small amount of money through reduced bandwidth costs.
For everyone else, rolling out HTTP 2 will be a massive initial and ongoing technical burden, with almost no benefit.